The Expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael (Gen 21:9-21)
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
The Expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael (Gen 21:9-21) The Expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael (Gen 21:9-21) Aron Pinker [email protected] Abstract: The episode of Hagar and Ishmael’s expulsion is reevaluated within the framework of typical reactions of a scorned woman. If it is assumed that Abraham tried to resolve his marital problems by separating Hagar and Ishmael from his household and settling them with their kin Muzrimites, then most of the textual difficulties are naturally resolved. Even if we interpret the Masoretic Text as an identification of Hagar being an Egyptian, nothing in the text compels us to conclude that she intended to return to Egypt on foot. There is biblical evidence that the relations between Ishmael and Isaac (and, perhaps, Abraham) were not severed. The geography of the region supports continued contact between Abraham, Isaac, Hagar, and Ishmael. Heav’n has no rage like love to hatred turn’d Nor Hell a fury, like a woman scorn’d. William Congreve (1670-1729)1 INTRODUCTION Hagar is mentioned in Genesis 16:1-16, 21:9-21, and 25:12. Of these texts the most problematic is Genesis 21:9-21, which deals with the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael from Abraham’s household, their travails in the desert, salvation by a divine agent, and settlement in the wilderness of Paran.22 This episode describes events so uncharacteristic to some of the actors that they did not fail to baffle the serious reader of the Masoretic Text since well in the past. Two decades ago Wiesel wrote “Abraham is synonymous with loyalty and abso- lute fidelity; his life a symbol of religious perfection. And yet a shadow hovers over one as- pect of his life. In his exalted biography, we encounter a painful episode which puzzles us. This is a situation in which Abraham, the husband, is an agonizing enigma. We refer, of • 1 Closing line of act III of The Mourning Bride, first produced in 1697. 2 These human-interest episodes have been subjected to considerable analysis, in particular from the feminist and womanist perspective. See J. Van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition, (New Haven: Yale University Press,1975), 193-4; P. Trible, Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narrative (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 9-35; J.A. Hackett, “Rehabilitating Hagar: Fragments of an Epic Pattern,” in Gender and Dif- ference in Ancient Israel, ed. P.L. Day (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989), 12-27; S.J. Teubal, Hagar the Egyptian: The Lost Tradition of the Matriarchs (New York: Harper-Collins, 1990); K.P. Darr, Far More Precious than Jewels: Perspectives on Biblical Women (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1991), 132-163; J.C. Exum, Fragmented Women: Feminist (Sub)version of Biblical Narratives (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Int., 1993), 130- 147; N. Steinberg, Kinship and Marriage in Genesis: A House hold Economics Perspective (Minneapolis: For- tress, 1993), 35-86; D.S. Williams, Sisters in the Wilderness: The Challenge of Womanist God-Talk (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1993), 15-34; A.O. Bellis, Helpmates, Harlots, and Heroes: Women’s Stories in the Hebrew Bible (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1994), 74-79. Women in Judaism: A Multidisciplinary Journal Spring 2009 Volume 6 Number 1 ISSN 1209-9392 © 2009 Women in Judaism, Inc. 1 The Expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael (Gen 21:9-21) course, to his behavior toward his concubine Hagar and their son Ishmael.”3 A ‘reality check’ of the story in Genesis 21:9-21 raises some obvious questions. One naturally wonders about the following points. 1. Why a rich man as Abraham did not provide his wife and son with some more substan- tial means for sustenance and transportation when expelled from his house? 2. How could Abraham let his wife and son go into the desert without being concerned for their personal safety? 3. Why was it necessary to carry a teenage boy as Ishmael and how could Hagar do it for a long distance? 4. How could Hagar venture into the wilderness of Beer-sheba carrying a child and being so ill equipped? Why didn’t she retrace her steps back seeing that she is in unfamiliar terrain? 5. How could Hagar hope to cross an arid wilderness with a child on her way to Egypt, as many commentators assert? 6. In the described episode Ishmael is entirely passive. How is that possible or why is it so? A closer analysis of the text reveals that much has been left unsaid and needs to be deciphered from the allusions, context, and logic of the narrative. The reader is naturally in- trigued by such questions as the following: that triggered such a forceful reaction (מצחק) ’What was the nature of Ishmael’s ‘playing .1 from Sarah? 2. In what manner was Ishmael’s ‘playing’ related to the inheritance? 3. Did Ishmael’s status in Abraham’s household automatically assure him rights of inheri- tance? 4. Was Sarah’s demand for Hagar’s and Ishmael’s expulsion a consequence of the fact that Isaac survived the critical period of an infant’s life in antiquity, The child grew and was weaned (Gen 21:8)? 5. Sarah emphasized in her demand for Hagar and Ishmael’s expulsion that Hagar was a What was the legal .(בן אמה) and Ishmael is the son of a slave (אמה) ’slave-woman‘ ground for Sarah’s demand? 6. What did Sarah really demand? 7. What were Abraham’s sentiments toward Hagar and Ishmael? ,(אמה) ’Did God validate Sarah’s claim that Hagar’s status was that of a ‘slave-woman .8 by stressing in His communication to Abraham that Hagar was his ‘slave-woman’ ?(אמתך) 9. Why does God depersonalize Hagar and Ishmael by calling them ‘slave-woman’ and ‘lad’ rather than by their personal names? 10. How could God be party to what appears to be an act of inhumanity? 11. Why does God stress in Genesis 21:17 twice that God heard the lad crying, though the Bible does not mention him speak or cry, while the crying of Hagar is not noted by God though the Bible says And she sat opposite him, and lifted up her voice and wept (Gen 21:16)? • 3 E. Wiesel, “Ishmael and Hagar,” in The Life of Covenant; the Challenge of Contemporary Judaism; Essays in Honor of Herman E. Schaalman, ed. J. A. Edelheit (Chicago: Spertus College of Judaica, 1986), 235. Women in Judaism: A Multidisciplinary Journal Spring 2009 Volume 6 Number 1 ISSN 1209-9392 © 2009 Women in Judaism, Inc. 2 The Expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael (Gen 21:9-21) appears superfluous in Genesis 21:17, why was it (באשר הוא שם) The phrase where he is .12 included? The purpose of this paper is to discuss the issues raised by the presented questions and to provide a consistent explanation of the biblical text. In doing so each of the questions posed would, hopefully, be answered, though they would not be addressed specifically and seriatim. We shall present our approach under the headings TRIGGERING EVENT, RESO- LUTION, EXECUTION, HAGAR’S REVENGE, DIVINE INTERVENTION, and AC- CEPTANCE, which present the milestones in the logical and linear evolution of the Masoretic Text. TRIGGERING EVENT The Masoretic Text seems to imply that Sarah was compelled to act in a forceful and mean? The Septuagint felt מצחק What does .מצחק determined manner when she saw Ishmael with Isaac her son” (µετὰ ’Ισαὰκ τοῦ υἱοῦ“ מצחק that the verse is too abrupt and adds to αὐτῆς). Since the Samaritan Bible has the same text as the Masoretic Text it is likely that the Septuagint addition is intended to make the reading smoother and is not original. The ,(מחײך) ”sporting” (παίζοντα), Targum Onqelos has “laughs at“ מצחק Septuagint renders Peshitta has “mocking,” and Vulgate has “mocks” (ludentem).4 Targum Jonathan also ex- .(וגחין לײ מגחך לפולחנא נוכראה) ”pands, saying “was obscene to idolatry and bowed to God Josephus (Ant. 1:214-215), purportedly presenting the episode “with great exactness,” does In his account, Sarah at first loved Ishmael with affection not inferior to .מצחק not refer to that of her own son. However, “when she herself had borne Isaac, she was not willing that Ismael should be brought up with him, as being too old for him, and able to do him injuries when their father should be dead.” Ishamael’s age advantage would have put him in control of the property, in case of Abraham’s death, or might have prompted him to physically eliminate Isaac, as was the case in successions among royalty. Paul, in his allegorical treat- .(persecuted” (Gal 4:29“ מצחק ment of Hagar’s expulsion, seems to have interpreted -attributed to Ishmael, also intrigued the Talmudic Sages. Some con ,מצחק The term sidered the act in which Ishmael was involved as being of a negative nature, others consid- ered it positively. We find in Genesis Rabba 53:11: something derogatory and I [מצחק] Said R’ Shimon Bar Yochai: R’ Akiba says about it is nothing but incest even מצחק say about it something positive. R’ Akiba explained that Gen 39:17). This) בא אלי העבד העברי אשר הבאת לנו לצחק בי as you read in the Scriptures teaches that Sarah our Matriarch used to see Ishmael copulating with women working in and ambushing other peoples’ wives and then raping them. Taught (מכביש גנות) the field ויקמו לצחק וישב העם is nothing but idolatry, as the Scriptures say צחוק R’ Ishmael the term Ex 32:6). This teaches that Sarah our Matriarch used to see Ishmael building) לאכל ושתו ’and hunt grasshoppers and sacrifice upon them.